July 6th, 2010 at Hilton Hotel

HANAZATO, TOSHIKAZU; SISWOUSUKARTO, SUPRAPTO; PRAMUMIJYO, SUBAGYO; UEKITA,

YASUFUMI; MATSUI, TOSHIYA; YAMATO, SATOSHI ; MINOWA, CHIKAHORO; ONO, KUNIHIKO;TANEICHI, MAI

8IMC_317

Seismic Assessment for Restoration of Prambanan World Heritage

Temples Damaged by the Central Java Earthquake of 2006, Indonesia

8IMC Seismic Assessment for Restoration of Prambanan World Heritage Temples Damaged by the Central Java Earthquake of 2006, Indonesia, Hanazato,T. et al. 227

1. IntroductionPrambanan World Heritage Temple

Siva Vishunu

Garuda

Hangsa

Brahuma

Nandi

Apit

8IMC Seismic Assessment for Restoration of Prambanan World Heritage Temples Damaged by the Central Java Earthquake of 2006, Indonesia, Hanazato,T. et al. 3/27

1. Introduction Unique Story

• Originated in 9th Century• Ruined during long history• Candy Siva :

Reconstructed by Other buildings : Reconstructed by Indonesian engineers in the end of 1980s

• Other buildings : Reconstructed by Indonesian engineers in the end of 1980’s

8IMC Seismic Assessment for Restoration of Prambanan World Heritage Temples Damaged by the Central Java Earthquake of 2006, Indonesia, Hanazato,T. et al. 4/27

1. Introduction Outlines of Project

Indonesian Government requested in emergency the cooperation of Japanese Government to assess the earthquake damage to Prambanan Temples.

• International collaborative project ( Japan-Indonesia ) have been successfully performed for over 3 years.

• Multi-disciplinary team was established.

8IMC Seismic Assessment for Restoration of Prambanan World Heritage Temples Damaged by the Central Java Earthquake of 2006, Indonesia, Hanazato,T. et al. 5/27

1. Introduction Objectives

(1)To identify the cause of the damage from a structural engineering point of view

(2)To conduct seismic diagnosis for safety of both the present and the post-restoration

8IMC Seismic Assessment for Restoration of Prambanan World Heritage Temples Damaged by the Central Java Earthquake of 2006, Indonesia, Hanazato,T. et al. 6/27

1. Introduction Inner Structure

Candi Garuda

8IMC Seismic Assessment for Restoration of Prambanan World Heritage Temples Damaged by the Central Java Earthquake of 2006, Indonesia, Hanazato,T. et al. 7/26

1. Introduction Earthquake Damage

8IMC Seismic Assessment for Restoration of Prambanan World Heritage Temples Damaged by the Central Java Earthquake of 2006, Indonesia, Hanazato,T. et al. 8/27

Kemelesakankaki 1 antara0,2 – 0,8 cm

Kaki 2 : 0,4 –1,8 cm

After Prambanan Restoration Office

2. Geotechnical and Structural Survey Irregular settlement of foundation

8IMC Seismic Assessment for Restoration of Prambanan World Heritage Temples Damaged by the Central Java Earthquake of 2006, Indonesia, Hanazato,T. et al. 9/27

Merapi

Prambanan

2. Geotechnical and Structural Survey Geographical Condition

8IMC Seismic Assessment for Restoration of Prambanan World Heritage Temples Damaged by the Central Java Earthquake of 2006, Indonesia, Hanazato,T. et al. 10/27

2. Geotechnical and Structural Survey Geotechnical Investigation

Dept

h

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

0 2 4 6 8 10

振動数 (Hz)

増幅

率

Natural Frequency of structures : 2.2-4.9Hz

Frequency (Hz)

8IMC Seismic Assessment for Restoration of Prambanan World Heritage Temples Damaged by the Central Java Earthquake of 2006, Indonesia, Hanazato,T. et al. 11/27

Dynamic earth pressure induced by earthquake

Earth pressuredue to gravityload=1.45x105Pa -2.5x105(Pa)

2. Geotechnical and Structural Survey Simulated Dynamic Earthquake-Pressure induced by Earthquake

8IMC Seismic Assessment for Restoration of Prambanan World Heritage Temples Damaged by the Central Java Earthquake of 2006, Indonesia, Hanazato,T. et al. 12/27

2. Geotechnical and Structural SurveyStability of soils and foundation

• Are the soils that support the Prambanantemples natural deposits or man-made embankment ?

• The geotechnical investigation indicates that the soils are natural ones and differential settlement of foundation was not caused by the seismic response to the Central Java Earthquake.

8IMC Seismic Assessment for Restoration of Prambanan World Heritage Temples Damaged by the Central Java Earthquake of 2006, Indonesia, Hanazato,T. et al. 13/26

2. Geotechnical and Structural Survey Microtremore Measurements

Candi NaturalFrequency

(Hz)Height

(m)Siva NS 2.24 47

EW 2.34Garuda NS 3.66 22

EW 3.69Brahma 3.05 37Vishnu 3.10 37Nandi 3.62-3.72 27.5Hangsa 4.05 22Apit 4.87 17

8IMC Seismic Assessment for Restoration of Prambanan World Heritage Temples Damaged by the Central Java Earthquake of 2006, Indonesia, Hanazato,T. et al. 14/27

2. Geotechnical and Structural Survey Sampling and Mechanical Tests

20-25km

8IMC Seismic Assessment for Restoration of Prambanan World Heritage Temples Damaged by the Central Java Earthquake of 2006, Indonesia, Hanazato,T. et al. 15/27

2. Geotechnical and Structural Survey Earthquake Ground Motion for Assessment

Peak Velocity =10.0 cm/s

YogyakartaAfter AIJ Report

8IMC Seismic Assessment for Restoration of Prambanan World Heritage Temples Damaged by the Central Java Earthquake of 2006, Indonesia, Hanazato,T. et al. 16/27

3. Seismic Response AnalysisAnalysis Model

Soils

Andesite Blocks

Tuff blocks

Inner Concrete

Soils

Beam Element

8IMC Seismic Assessment for Restoration of Prambanan World Heritage Temples Damaged by the Central Java Earthquake of 2006, Indonesia, Hanazato,T. et al. 17/27

3. Seismic Response AnalysisSimulation – input motion : Athens EQ of 1999

Input level :PGV=12.4cm/sPGA=0.217G

8IMC Seismic Assessment for Restoration of Prambanan World Heritage Temples Damaged by the Central Java Earthquake of 2006, Indonesia, Hanazato,T. et al. 18/27

3. Seismic Response Analysis Analysis Results - Stress in Stone and Rubble

Max. Tensile stress = 0.90N/mm2

Principal Stress Shear Stress

8IMC Seismic Assessment for Restoration of Prambanan World Heritage Temples Damaged by the Central Java Earthquake of 2006, Indonesia, Hanazato,T. et al. 19/27

3. Seismic Response Analysis Flexural Moment Induced in RC Frame

21700Nm

10000Nm

9330Nm

7020Nm

1281Nm

8IMC Seismic Assessment for Restoration of Prambanan World Heritage Temples Damaged by the Central Java Earthquake of 2006, Indonesia, Hanazato,T. et al. 20/27

3. Seismic Response AnalysisMaximum Acceleration Response Ratio

100

8IMC Seismic Assessment for Restoration of Prambanan World Heritage Temples Damaged by the Central Java Earthquake of 2006, Indonesia, Hanazato,T. et al. 21/27

Candi Angsa

3. Seismic Response AnalysisEarthquake Monitoring

8IMC Seismic Assessment for Restoration of Prambanan World Heritage Temples Damaged by the Central Java Earthquake of 2006, Indonesia, Hanazato,T. et al. 22/27

3. Seismic Response Analysis Acceleration Record (NS-Comp.) of March 25,2008

-10

-5

0

5

10

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50

(gal)

3ch

-15

-10

-5

0

5

10

15

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50

(gal)

5ch

-6

-4

-2

0

2

4

6

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50

(gal)

7ch

-10

-5

0

5

10

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50

(gal)

1chPeak=5Gal

Peak=2Gal

TOP

MIDDLE

BASE

GROUND

8IMC Seismic Assessment for Restoration of Prambanan World Heritage Temples Damaged by the Central Java Earthquake of 2006, Indonesia, Hanazato,T. et al. 23/27

3. Seismic Response AnalysisFourier Spectrum of the acceleration at Top (NS-Comp.) of Earthquake of March 25,2008

0.00

0.01

0.02

0.03

0.04

0.05

0.06

0.07

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10Frequency(Hz)

FFT A

MPLIT

UD

E 2ch3.3Hz

8IMC Seismic Assessment for Restoration of Prambanan World Heritage Temples Damaged by the Central Java Earthquake of 2006, Indonesia, Hanazato,T. et al. 24/27

4. Conclusions (1)Structural assessment of the stone heritage structures affected by earthquakes has been studied for the structural restoration of the Prambanan Temples damaged by the Central Java Earthquake of 2006, Indonesia.

1. The structural analysis indicate that the inner concrete structures were not seriously damaged by the earthquake for the cases of Candi Garuda and Angsa

8IMC Seismic Assessment for Restoration of Prambanan World Heritage Temples Damaged by the Central Java Earthquake of 2006, Indonesia, Hanazato,T. et al. 25/27

4. Conclusions (2)2. The analysis also indicate that the apparent

differential settlement of the foundation was not caused by the earthquake.

3. Whipping phenomena of the structural response caused the serious damage to the decorative stones of stupa and ratona. The dynamic seismic loads for designing strengthening of the decorative stones were provided by the simulation.

8IMC Seismic Assessment for Restoration of Prambanan World Heritage Temples Damaged by the Central Java Earthquake of 2006, Indonesia, Hanazato,T. et al. 26/27

Conclusions (3)4. The predominant period of the surface soil

response corresponded to the natural frequency of the structures. Such resonant behaviors might cause the serious damage to the Prambanan Temples.

5. The seismic response analysis indicated that the response of the stone structure was significantly affected by strain-dependent soil stiffness of the surrounding soils during the earthquake.

8IMC Seismic Assessment for Restoration of Prambanan World Heritage Temples Damaged by the Central Java Earthquake of 2006, Indonesia, Hanazato,T. et al. 27/27

Conclusions (4)

It was suggested that dynamic soil-structure interaction should be considered to study earthquake response of such massive and rigid structures on deposited soils.

International Cooperation in Conservation of Cultural Heritages has been successfully performed for 4 yours.